Australian Council for Educational Administration Reproductions

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 355 640 EA 024 741

AUTHOR Aldrich, Richard TITLE The Emerging Culture of Educational Administration: A UK Perspective. PUB DATE Jul 92 NOTE 19p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Council for Educational Administration (Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia, July 5-8, 1992). PUB TYPE Speeches/Conference Papers (150) Viewpoints (Opinion/Position Papers, Essays, etc.) (120)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Administrative Change; *Administrative Organization; *Educational Administration; *Educational Change; *Educational History; Elementary Secondary Education; Foreign Countries IDENTIFIERS *United Kingdom

ABSTRACT Organization of the United Kingdom's education system mirrors its political divisions; education is different and somewhat autonomous in each area: England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The Department of Education and Science, based in London, oversees the English education system. Education in the United Kingdom has a longstanding foundation of voluntary provision based on the Church and private philanthropy. In recent years, local power in English education has been based in some 100 Local Education Authorities (LEAs). This has led to some wide disparities between educational systems. The educational system is divided into primary schools, secondary schools, and higher education. The overriding feature of all three parts is that historically they have not invested much in administration. The origins of educational reform can be traced to three sources: the oil crisis of 1973-74, Labour party views, and the Conservative radicalism of Margaret Thatcher. This Conservative educational view was implemented through a series of reform laws. It is still uncertain what the long-term effect of this reform period will be. However, the role of educational administration and administrators has been changed significantly, and local educational authorities have been depleted. (JPT)

*********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** 47i4

in THE EMERGING CULTURE OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION: Cst A UK PERSPECTIVE

Richard Aldrich University of London Instituteof Education

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Once of Educahonai Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC1 Fle:isdocument has been reproduced as received from the person or organization ong.nahng O Minor changes have been made to Improve reprOtluCtiOn Quality

PoInts of view or op.mons stated in this dzku. meat do not necessarily reoreSent off.c.al OE RI pos.tIon or potty

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

BEST COVII

2 The Emerging Culture of Educational Administration: a UK perspective

by Richard Aldrich

University of London Institute of Education United Kingdom

Abstract

This paper is divided into five sections.It begins with a briefoutline of the salientfeatures of the educational systems of the United Kingdomand of the organizational cultures of its educational institutions. It then proceeds to an analysis of recent educationalreform, with particular reference to organization and administration, under three broad headings: origins, implementation, outcomes.

The systems

The United Kingdom iscurrently composedof four elements: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Broad population figures are England - 47.5 million; Scotland - 5 million; Wales - 3 million; NorthernIreland - 1.5 million - a total of some 57 millions,very roughlythree timesaslarge asthat of Australia. The population is virtually static,the last20 years has seen an increase of about one per cent.It is a densely populated country, but although the modern industrial and urban revolutions came firstto Britain,andthe vast majorityof peopleliveintowns, theideals, imagesand culture of manyBritish people arefirmly rooted in the countryside. Although urban areas tend to overlap into each other in the United Kingdom, so that places which in another country might be deemed as one city are divided up into two or three,it should be noted that,London apart, which hasa declining population and has been at the centre of the recent economic downturn, thereare (by internationalstandards)noother really large cities in the United Kingdom. The country's second, city, Birmingham, only has a population of onemillion, considerably smaller than those of Sydney or Melbourne. The contrast between the geographical sizes of the two countries could hardly be greater. The 246,050 sq kms of the UK would fit into Australia more than 30 times. Another factor in modern British society is that of unemployment. It is difficult toobtain precise figures, but in 1992 some two and half millionpeople in the United Kingdomare unemployed. This should beseen as part of a general Western European trend. In 1970 unemploymentin Western Europe stood at 2.5 million. This rose to 7.8 millionin 1978, 14 million in 1982 and 16 million in 1987.Some 40 per cent of this figure was accounted for by young people. (Unesco, 1991, 61)

It is right to talk of the educationalsystems of the United Kingdom, for there are differencesbetween the separate parts. This shows at the centre, for whilethe Secretary of State for Education and Science oversees education inEngland and has broad powers in respect of higher education,the other parts of the education service are headed by theSecretaries of State for Scotland, Wales and NorthernIreland respectively. Thus while there is an overall uniformityin the systems historic differences still remain.

Scotland is the most independent of thethree smaller areas for four reasons: it is the second largestpartner; the Scottish Education Department has hada separate existence for over 100 years; Scotlandhas its ownseparate legalandreligious establishment; the Scots firmly believe thattheir educational system is superior to those of the rest of the UnitedKingdom. There are tangible differences. For exampleScottish university students take a four-year first degreecourse; students in the rest ofthe United Kingdom have only threeyears.Scottish teachers have had a General Teaching Council since1965; those in the rest of the United Kingdom donot.

This paper will, of necessity, focus primarilyupon education in England, which has a populationmore than four times greater than Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland together,and, in London, the seat of legislative and executivepower.

The Department of Education and Science is based in London,and is headed by a Secretary of State. Though centralpower in education, which began in a desultoryway in 1839, preceded that of local government which dates from 1870, education in the United Kingdom has a longstanding foundation ofvoluntary provision based on the Church and private philanthropywhich stretches back to the middle ages. Not until 1899was a Board of Education established, only in 1944 did it become a Ministry. In 1964 it was renamed the Department ofEducation andScience.Traditionally politicians who headed education were of second rank, and few served for any length of time.'One notable exception was Margaret Thatcher who heldthe post from 1970 to 1974, and wasthe only oneto have become Prime Minister. In recent Conservativegovernments it has been occupied by three prominent politicians: Keith Joseph,1981-6, Kenneth Baker,1986-9,and Kenneth Clarke,1990-2.Of lower status were Mark Carlisle, 1979-81, and John MacGregor, 1989-

4 90, and the current Secretary of State, John Patten,appointed in April 1992, following the fourth Conservative victory.

The centralauthorityin English education hastended to exercise a supervisory, rather than an initiatory role. It isa small department and has some 2,500 employees,many of whom are engaged in the administrationof teachers' pensions. It hasno regional organization. Central government has not been in the business ofowning or running schools or other educational institutions. Crucial to this supervision have been Her Majesty's Inspectors(HMI),whose existence and prestigious title date back to 1839. Their originalpurpose was to inspect schools which wished to qualify for government grants. The HMI have always claimed a semi-independence from the Department,so that the chief inspector's annual reportmay be seen as a report to Parliament which may be critical of central government policy,for example by pointing outpoor quality buildings or shortages of textbooks whichmay be ascribed to under-funding. Such semi-independence has always beena source of contention,notleastin thelasttwo years,when the Conservative government tried to abolish, orseriously to reduce the inspectorate and its powers.

In recent years local power in English education has been based upon some 100 Local Education Authorities (LEAs). This local authority tradition stems from 1870 when itwas decided that publicly-funded schools should be organized and controlledat local rather than central level. LEAs are based upon traditional local units: counties, towns and London boroughs. The largest group are the 47 county councils. TheLEAs vary considerably in size. For example thecounty of Hampshire has a population of1.5 million,the bcrough of Kingstona mere 133,000. Even smaller are the City of London andthe Scilly Isles. (Sharp and Dunford, 1990, 61) Since 1902 LEAs,each of which has an Education Committee composed of elected councillors and co-opted members,a Chief Education Officer, and a team of inspectorsor advisers, have had the duty of providing primary and secondary schooling,and a range ofother educational -facilities, including further education and polytechnics, in theirarea. Many schools with religious foundations or connections (nearly 30per cent of the whole) are also controlled by the LEAs,or otherwise aided from public funds. Indeed LEAs have had direct responsibility for the expenditure of more than 80per cent of all public money spent on education, even though a considerable proportion of such money has come from centrally-raised taxes ratherthan from local rates or (more recently) the polltax.

Educationis by far thelargest single activity of local government. In the 1992-3 local authority finance settlement for England the government has set total standard spendingat £41,811 million, of which Education's share is £18,730million. (DES, 1992, 1) 4 -

Local power in education has led to considerable local diversity, not least in the matter of localfinance. By the 1970s some LEAs were spending twice as much money perhead per pupil asothers. Although central government policies have recently reduced these discrepancies considerablevariations remain. Annual spending per pupil in the counties rangesfrom £2,038 in Buckinghamshire to £1,621 in Cleveland; in metropolitan districts from £2,183 in Wolverhamptonto £1,737 in Solihull; in London from £2,833in Brent to£1,774 in Richmond,the borough that produced the bestresults in the firstnational tests for seven-year-olds. (Marston, 1992) Discrepancies over particular items withinbudgets are even higher. For example in 1989-90 some LEAs spentfive times as much as others per pupil on books andeducational equipment.

DifferencesbetweenLEAs reflect therelative weakness of central control over education and thehistorical development of an impressive profession of local educational administrators. In some areasthe Chief Education Officer, often by dint of long service, managed to achieve an independence from theelectedauthorityand to promote a particular educational structure and ethos.This was the case in Leicestershirewhere Sir William Brockingtonservedas Director of Education from 1903 to 1947, tobe succeeded by Stewart Mason, who held the post until1971. In Leicestershire a system of juniorhigh schools was developed which catered for all pupils until14. Otherlocal administrators who hada profound influence included Henry Morris who,in Cambridgeshire from 1922 to 1954, organized the groupingof all educational and social agencies in rural areas intovillage colleges. In the West Riding of Yorkshire, SirAlec Clegg, Chief Officer from 1945 to 1974, promoted informal methodsin primary schools and pioneered middle schools for pupilsaged nine to 13. The third tier of educationaladministration exists at school level.In1944the principle of a governing bodyfor each school was established, although practicevaried widely from LEA to LEA, and there wascriticism that in too many cases governing bodies were dominated bypolitical appointments. All children must attend schoolsbetween the age of five and 16. Although, as indicated above, there is some variation between LEAs, for most children theprimary stage consists of infant schooling to seven and juniorschooling till 11, when all transfer to secondary schools.Although more than 90 per cent of children in stateschools now attend comprehensive secondary schools, someLEAs, for example theborough of Kingston-upon-Thames,and the county ofKent,still divide children at age 11 according toability. Some go on to grammar schools;the remainder proceedto what are referred toas comprehensives but are essentiallythe old secondary modern schools writ large.

6 About seven per cent of children in England attend independent schools - including the so-called 'public' schools, like Eton and Harrow. These fee-paying schools still exert great influence. Currently some half of all undergraduate students at Oxford and Cambridge come from fee-paying schools. Almost all members of Conservative cabinets, includingSecretaries of State for Education (though not John Patten) have sent, and still send, their own children to fee-paying schools.

Organizational cultures

Thissection is concerned to show the extent of diversity within the traditional organizational cultures of the English educational system. It relies heavily upon the work of Charles Handy (Handy, 1984) and may be taken as a general broad-brush picture ofthesituation which existed beforethe current period of change, for the specific purpose of highlighting the effect of such changes. a) Primary schools

Primary schools in England are heirsto two traditions. The first is the elementary school of the nineteenthcentury which from 1862 to 1895 was dominated by the system of 'payment by results'. This immediate and highly visible system of accountability, which meant that a school'sgrant from central government depended in considerable measureupon the pupils' performance in annual examinations, hada marked effect upon curricula, teaching methods, and the relationshipbetween teachers and their inquisitors- the HMI. Essentially the role of the elementary school was to teach the basics- the 3 Rs and to send children directly to work.

During the twentieth century this traditionwas modified in several ways. First, the elementary schoolwas replaced by the primary school, which at age 11 sent childrennot to work but to the next stage in their schooling. The effectiveness of the new kind ofaccountability, the eleven plus' examination, which determined whether children proceeded to secondary grammar, technical or modern schools, diminished from the 1960s with the rapid introduction of comprehensive secondary schools. To many commentators the 1960s appeared to witness the victory of a progressive, child-centred philosophy which lacked direction and rigour in terms of both curricula and standards, a victory apparently epitomized by the Plowden Report of 1967, entitled Children and their Primary Schools.

Primary schools were, and have largely remained, smallin size, frequently smaller indeed thanthe elementary schools which preceded them. Therefore the numbers of adults employed full- timein suchschools - headteacher, senior teacher, other teachers, school secretary, caretaker, may be quite small- a dozen perhaps - even fewer. Most teachers in such schools have the same essential responsibility - to be in charge of a class of children. In such circumstances, where the basic role is common to all, a'club' culture may flourish. The purpose of the institution is clear and a general educational ethos or spirit may prevail. This club culture is like a wheel with the headteacher at the hub. Lines of communication (thespokes) are short, and all teachers (and others) can have direct access to the centre. b) Secondary schools Secondaryschools have invariably been larger than primary schools. Though schools of 2,000 and more pupils, as in the days ofthe first comprehensive schools, are no longer the norm, establishments of more than 1,000 pupils are not exceptional. In such schools the club culture cannot easily operate. Insteadthey arerunon aroleculture. If the organization of the primary school resembles a wheel, that of the secondary school is shaped more like a pyramid.

At thehead of the pyramid is the headteacher orschool principal.In the next tier come deputy heads or assistant principals. Heads of faculty hold sway over heads of subjects who in turn direct thework of other teachers of those subjects. The prime duty of teachers in a role culture is not to be responsi3le for a particular class, but for aparticular subject area; although parallel to the academic hierarchy may be a pastoral tier, based on a house or year system. Therole culture of the secondary school is visible, formal, and full of procedures. It is more bureacratic than the club culture, and there is a greater need for formal meetings with agenda and minutes. Direct access to the headteacher for a junior teacher or other memberof staffmaybe difficult. AsHandy has observed, the main characteristic of a role culture is that it is 'managed rather than led'. (Handy, 1984, 12),

c) Higher education Higher education,and particularly university education, has been organized more on a person culture. The purposeof such a culture(and person culturesalsoexist in thelegal and medical professions among others) is to allow as much freerein as possible to the individual. Thusthe leading academic was given tenure and freedom to research, to writes, and toteach in a largely unfettered way.Such people were not managed or controlled. The role of the bursar in a college or university, of a chief clerk in a law firm, was of lower status.The vice- chancellorship in an ancient university, even the role of head of a department, might be a rotating job. The great purpose of academic life was not to manage, not even to lead anacademic institution, but rather to make contributions toknowledge on a national or international scale. -7 -

What effect did these organizational cultures haveupon those who were being educated? In the primary school the children might be seen as workers - given specific tasksto perform within a supportive environment bya teacher who knew them well.

In higher education studentswere clients. They chose their placesandsubjects of study. If dissatisfied theymight transfer to another course, or to another postgraduate supervisor.

In secondary schools pupils were like products onan assembly line. They might begin the day with a period of mathematics, followed by a period of music, followed by another of French, then a double period of science. Aftera lunch break they might have a period of physical education and then, tired and aching, conclude the day with double geography. Each of these activities mighttake place ina different classroom,with different teachers, who might noteven know their names. Little wonder that many pupils in sucha system became confused by the whole exercise.

The overriding feature of all the three cultures,however, insofar as they were applied to education,was that they did not invest much money,time or space in administration.In consequence it could be argued that educational institutions were relatively inefficient enterprises. This problemwas exacerbated by the fact that schools inthe United Kingdom were trying to fulfil a wider range of purposes than those in many other countries: academic, pastoral, custodial, spiritual, moral, physical, etc.Teachers at all levels saw their key rolesas being to carry out this multiplicity of purposes; managerial tasks had a much lower priority. Only in therole culture of the large secondary school did theheadteacher, perforce, become a full-timemanager. Indeed on occasion the headteacher, being the onlyperson apart from the secretary or caretaker without a substantial teaching role, ended up performing a variety of low-level administrative tasks.

On the other hand it could be argued that the lackof office space, the small amount of time spent in administrationper se, the desire of most teachers not to be'promoted out of the classroom', meant that schools and other educational institutions were highly efficient places in thatthe central purpose of the education of children remained paramount.

Differences in organizational culture within theeducational system itself, therefore, existed alongside the differencesin organizational culture between LEAs.

One of the major effects of the educational reformsof recent years in England has been to diminish the differences between these organizational cultures.

9 The origins of educationalreform

The origins of reform in educationin the UK may be traced to three sources.

The first was the oil crisisof 1973-4 which finallybrought home to Britain that the oldimperialist days and legacieswere finished and that the self-indulgencesof the 1960s, the hippy culture, the flowerpower, the Beatles, etc., were also atan end.

The second was that this changein respect of educationwas grasped by some Labour politicians,and articulated by the-then Prime Minister, James Callaghan,in a speech at Ruskin College, Oxford in October 1976. Thethree principles which Callaghan outlined were: financial stringency-'as high efficiencyas possible by the skilful use of existing resources'; back to basics and the raising ofstandards, pupils must be equipped - 'to do a job ofwork ; consumerrights - 'teachers...must satisfythe parentsand industry'.

Thus in the 1970s accountability - in terms of finance, standards and consumers- was placed on the agenda by a Labour government, but ve :y little was actually done- instead it led to a 'Great Debate', which producedmany discussions but few outcomes. This was partly because the Callaghangovernment was faced with more immediate problems: rampant inflation, unemployment, and a series of strikes whichculminated in the 'winter of discontent' in 1978-9which swept Margaret Thatcher to the first of her three victories: 1979, 1983 and 1987.

The third element was the Conservative radicalism of Margaret Thatcher, who had previouslybeenSecretary of State for Education, 1970-4,a position in which she had felt herself unable to exercisemuch control. Shewas also, as Prime Minister,to be hurt by the refusal of her old university, Oxford, to grant her a Prime Minister'scustomary accolade of an honorary degree.

Margaret Thatcher is a grocer's daughter. She, like JohnMajor, identifies with the small businessperson, having to make his or her own way in the world,living above the family shop, striving to survive in a fiercely competitive environment.She was totally opposed to featherbedding, to restrictive practices, and to overpowerful trade unions andprofessions, whether like theminers who had brought down the Heath government in 1974, or the lawyers, doctors or teacherswhom she suspected of providing inefficient and overpricedservices.

10 She was against state monopolies and state socialism, against what she regarded as aspuriousand ineffective compassirn which provided jobs for unproductive functionaries at central and local levels, which led to the politics ofenvy and the economics of inaction, and which lowered the living standards of all in the pursuit of a spurious equality. In her view the way to improve the quality of life within the United Kingdom, andto make the country great again, wasto throw off the corporate, collectivist structures which had developed since 1945 and to follow instead the examples of such competitive economies as Japan and Singapore. Though her chief targets were on the political left Margaret Thatcher also had little time for the fudgers and moderates, the 'wets', within her own party, particularly for those who themselves came from the traditional ruling classes. By 1990 she had ousted all really independent thinking from her Cabinet and was acting in a presidential, some wouldsay even, a royal, style.It was for this reason that eventually,in November 1990, she was overthrown, not by the electorate but by herown party.

Nevertheless though Margaret Thatcherwas unseated, and may complain aboutsome of the actionsof hersuccessor, the Conservative victory of April 1992 confirmed thesea change which had taken place, and its acceptance by the electorate.

Martin Jacques (Jacques, 1992) summed up the situation admirably: The 1980s marked an historic transition froma society of mass production, class-based identity and collectivism to a more individualised culture where identities are more numerous and more fluid, and society is amore mobile affair. The great achievement of Mrs Thatcherwas to recognise that change and seek to cast it in herown image.' This happened in education, as inmany other areas. The three principles enunciated by Callaghan in 1976 - financial stringency, raising of standards, andconsumer rights - were taken over and reshaped in a Conservative mould.

Financialstringencynow meantmoreaccountabilityatall levels, and the pruning of certain types of expenses: bureacrats, student grants, school meals and milk.

Raising standards was seen to dependupon the establishment of nationalscales of measurement so that, forexample, the attainments of pupils and schools could be madepublic. This would promote competition between pupils, betweenschools, and between differenttypesof schools.Comprehensive secondary schools would not have the monopoly.Independent schools would be aided, existinggrammar schools preserved, and new types of school- the city technology colleges - created. Good schools would flourish; bad schools would be drivenout of existence. -10-

Consumer rights necessitated a reduction in the powersof the producers. LEA bureacracy and bureaucratic controlwould be reduced: in 1989 LEAs in England and Walesemployed 944,000 persons,only 537,000 of whom wereteachers and lecturers. (Statham and Mackinnon, 1991, 94) LEA representation on school governing bodies would be drastically cut: to bereplaced by parents, and representatives of localemployers. The influence of powerful teacher unions, particularly theleft-wing National Union of Teachers, would be reduced. The tenureof university teachers would be abolished.

Implementation

Implementation of Conservative policy in education wasachieved by a substantial programme of legislation, the mainfeatures of which are outlined in this section.

In 1979 therequirement forLEAs to reorganize secondary schooling on comprehensive lines was withdrawn. Elevenplus selection and grammar schools thus continued in some areas. In 1980 the right of parents (and teachers) to berepresented on governing bodies was secured. Parents werealso allowed to express preferences for schools. LEAduties in respect of the provision of nursery places and school meals were replaced by powers. Assisted places at independentsecondary schools were provided for able children from state schools. In 1991-2 there are some 30,000 such places in300 independent schools. More than one third of these pupils have free places. Someparental contributions, based on income, are required for the others. In 1981 new procedures were introduced for theidentification and assessment of children with special educational needs,who, where possible, should be educated in general schools. In 1983 full cost fees for overseas students wereintroduced in further and higher education. In 1983 an Audit Commission was establishedunder the Local Government Finance Act of 1982. Of its first 14 reportsbetween February 1984 and March 1986 three were concerned with education. In1986 the Commission publisheda handbook on Peformance Review in Local Government which covered seven areas education. This report 717arlitiEngotherthings, that therewas toomuch suggested, amongst overcapacity in the school system and that LEAs should 'delegateas much responsibility aspossibleto headsand governing bodies, together with the authority todischarge it.' (Sharp and Dunford, 1990,39) Between 1985 and 1990 345,000 surplus places were removed from secondaryschools and 180,000 from primary schools. (DES, 1992,18) In 1986 the composition and powers of school governing bodies were set down in detail. The government had originally intended that half of the places on governing bodies should be taken by parents, but this proposal found little favour, even amongst parental groups. Essentially it was to be a four-way split: between parents, LEA representatives, teachers and local community members. There were to be annual parents' meetings and schools, like other businesses, were to publish an annual report. Other issues dealt with in this catch-all Act included control of the school curriculum, sex education, the length of terms and holidays, the disciplining of pupils, the appointment and dismissal of staff and the freedom of speech in higher education. Many of these points arose from specific confrontationsaffecting the education service, which saw widespread teachers' strikes in the period 1984-6. From May1986the mood changed.In that month the hugely- confident Kenneth Baker became Secretary of State, in place of the sensitive, agonising Sir Keith Joseph, who had held the post since 1981. In 1987 when the Conservatives were returned for a third term, education, at last, becametopof the political agenda.

In1987 theexisting mechanism for decidingteachers' pay (established in 1919) was scrapped. Teacherswere deprived of all negotiating rights. Minimum hours of work were determined by statute. Teachers' pay negotiating rights were never to be restored: instead in 1991 a Pay Review Body (broadly welcomed, but opposed by the National Union of Teachers) was set up. The 1987 legislation may be seen as both the final element in the piecemeal approach andthe first indication of central government's determinationto redistribute power within the education service.

The Education Reform Act of 1988 Act (the Baker Act) not only held outradicalsolutions butalso covered virtuallyall aspects of the education service.

A national curriculum of ten subjects (three core- English, Mathematics and Science: seven foundation- History, Geography, Technology, Music, Art, Physical Education and (at the secondary level) a foreign language) was to be followed by all pupils in state schools (but not independent schools). This was the old subject-based, grammar-school curriculum of 1904 which wasnow to beappliedthroughout theyears of compulsory schooling; National testing of all pupils in state schools would take place at the ages of seven, 11,14 and 16, and the results would be published. Both national curriculum and national testing were to be under the direct control of the Secretary of State,a complete reversal of recent practice, and in sharp

at) -12- contrast tothe principles of marketforcesand consumer- orientation;

Open enrolment would be enforced so that schools couldrecruit pupils up to the maximum of their capacity,to prevent LEAs fromdistributing pupils between schools and from fixing artificial limits;

The Inner London Education Authority,thelargest and only single-purpose LEA in the country,was abolished, even though a poll amongst its parents showed that 93per cent wished it to continue. Its powers were transferred to 13 local boroughs and to the City of London;

Local management of schools was established. Governing bodies would receive the school budget, basedon a weighted per capita formula,and would be responsible for spending it.Certain items would remain with the LEAs, for example capital expenditure, debt charges, central administration, local inspectors/advisers, and home-schooltransport. LEAs were given some discretion in respect of other areas, for example school meals and educational psychology, but thesewere not to be more than seven per cent of the budget;

Grant-maintained schools were introduced. Schools could, if the parents voted to do so, opt out of LEA control altogether. Such schools would receive all their budget directly via central government who would recoup the appropriate local authority contribution. Grant-maintained schools would be like independent schools,though financed with public money. The government believed that thousands of schools would wish to follow this route, but as yet few have chosen to do so. There are well over 20,000 schools in England alone. Of these, by January 1992, only nine primary and 134 secondary schools had opted out. Some schools, however, were clearly waiting to see the result of the election of April 1992, for the Labour party had pledged to return grant-maintained schools to the LEAs. Conservative victory in that election may well mean that the numbers will now rapidly increase;

City technology colleges were confirmed by the Act. These were to givespecial prominenceto science andtechnology,and financial support from the business community was sought. This has not been forthcoming, in spite of considerable financial support from central government.

Polytechnics and other colleges were removed from LEA control. These now came under the control of a new funding body, the Polytechnics and Colleges Funding Council (PCFC). A new Universities Funding Council (UFC) replaced the old Universities Grants Committee. Appointment to both was in the hands of the Secretary of State. Academic tenure for university teachers was to be abolished. 7.13-

From 1988 much of the government's time and energy was takenup in implementing the Act. There were some minor retreats along the way, but the central thrust of making schools publicly accountable through the results of their pupils continued.The firstassessments of seven yearolds in 1991showed the following results.

National Curriculum assessment results, 1991- Key Stage I percentages

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Other

English 21 61 17 1 Mathematics 25 66 6 3 Science 9 67 22 2 Level 2 is the attainment expected ofseven year olds. Level 1 is below, Level 3 above. The last column includes pupils who failed to reach Level 1 or who were not assessed. (DES, 1992, 8)

Further reforms emerged,especially with the advent ofthe ebullient Kenneth Clarke, who came to Education from Health where he had introduced massive changesintothe National Health Service.The fullrigour (ordementia) of the new educational programme was interrupted temporarily by the resistance of the House of Lords and the election of April 1992.

Those elements which remain include:

Theremoval of sixth form colleges andfurthereducation colleges (for 16-year-olds and above) fromLEA control. From April 1993 these will be funded bya new Further Education Funding Council (FEFC).

The ending of the distinction between polytechnics and universities. In future all polytechnics will become universities and all will be funded byone body on a broadly competitive basis.

Superior funding for grant-maintained schools,so that some 2,000 secondary schools arenow considering opting out of LEA control.

Outcomes

It is not easy to predict the eventual outcome of the educational reforms of the period 1979-1992. Some, like the national curriculum and national testing,have already been modified; their size and complexity have been shownto be counter-productive. But though theremay be modifications of

15 detail the broad strategy will no doubt continue for the next five years at least.

How will these affect educational administrators and administration at central, local and institutional levels? a) Central government At central government level there has been no large increase in the numbers of civil servants, nor is any intended. DES employees (excluding casual staff) 1986-7 1987-8 1988-9 1989-90 1990-1 1991-2 1992-3 1993-4 1994-5

2,420 2,477 2,564 2,556 2,606 2,699 2,765 2,765 2,765 (est.) (plan) (plan) (plan)

(DES, 1992, p. 43)

Indeed these figures take no account of the intended substantial reduction in the numbers of HMI.

Nor hasthe new policy-making powerat the centreas yet enhanced the role and status of central educational administrators; rather has it increased the power of politicians over those administrators.Twoexamples may be given. The first isthe reduction in the numbers of HMI to which reference has already been made. The government believes that HMI have presided over a decline in school standards. Accordingly it proposes that schools should be inspected by private teams which would include a strong representation of 'consumer' interests. Teacher training provides the second example. In January 1992 Kenneth Clarke decided that institutions which trained teachers were too concerned with promoting egalitarian ideology, and insufficiently focused upon the practicalities of classroom teaching. He, therefore, decided that in future at least 80 per cent of teacher training should take place in schools, and that school teachers, rather than teacher trainers, should be in the lead in all aspects of initial training. Two leading civil servants responsible for teacher training within the DES were deemed to be insufficiently enthusiastic in this cause, and suffered in consequence. b) Local government

At local level a greatreduction in the numbers of LEA administrators istaking place. Only a rump of their former services, finances and powers remainswith theLEAs. The virtual elimination of bureacracy - non-teaching posts - within the education system is the government's priority. This process

16 -15- may indeed, over the next five years,lead to the complete abolition of LEAs. Such abolition hasbeen justified upon historical grounds. Between 1839 and 1870 an educational system was built up in England which provided schooling for virtually all the children inthe country,without any recourse to local educational boards. The basic principle of that system was that schools were under voluntary control and relied upon three sources of funds: fees paid by parents; charitable donations; grants from central government given according to the principle of payment by results. Success, rather than need, was the basic criterion for state aid. Locally-elected school boards and their schools, established from 1870,were originally intended simply to'fill up the gaps', in areas where local charity and the extreme poverty of parents made for particular difficulty. Instead, however, by the first decade of the twentieth century state schools became the norm rather than the exception.

It hasgenerally beenarguedthat this was because state schools were superior to voluntary schools. Contemporary Conservative ideology rather emp.lasizesthe inefficiency of stateschools.Nowthat polytechnics,colleges andfurther education institutions have been removed from LEA control, if, duringthe nextfour years,sufficient s '-hools (influenced perhaps by financial inducements)can be persuaded to become grant-maintained schools,then LEAs mayin 'iminated. The small geographical size of England,the brew' own oflocal allegiances with the frequent redrawing oflc al boundaries (even the abolition of historic counties)renaars this more likely than in many other countries. c) Educational institutions

In educational institutions two cultures- those of the club and the person- are rapidly disappearing. The role culture of the secondary school,together with its curriculum, isfast supplantingthe club culture oftheprimaryschool. Tasks arising from local management of schools,from the need to compete for pupils and from the national curriculum and national assessment,mean that all teachers have, perforce, become administrators as well.A recent survey showedthat school teachers work foran average of 52 hours per week, and that the majority of that time isnot spent in actual teaching. Higher education institutionsare also rapidly moving away from the person culture. Academic auditsof research and teaching, competitive tendering for students, totalquality management, the projected doubling ofstaff-student ratios, the need still further to reduce unitcosts, which in the 1980s were cut by 37 per cent in universitiesand 21 per cent in polytechnics and colleges,means that, in the interests of sheersurvival, 7 -16-

higher education institutions are appointing experienced administrators, often fromoutside education, rather than eminent scholars at their head. d) Conclusion

In conclusion, therefore, in the1990s as regards England, and the United Kingdom more broadly,educational administration and administrators are being subjectedto considerable change. This change may be interpreted in differentways. For example at one level it stems essentially fromthe fact that education,in common with many other aspects of British life andculture, is being recast in a market-oriented, competitiveandcost- effective mould (although itshould be notedthat central government rather than the consumers has determined the curriculum). The next step,indeed, may be a return topayment by results.

At another level, however, thesechanges reflect the desire of the Conservative party (given theirrecord of four electoral victories) to placeas much control of educationas possible into the hands of central,as opposed to local, government

Of those educational adminstrators employed by central government some (including more than half the HMI)may be made redundant, while for those whoremain there will be increased work loads, often in administeringeducational policies with which they have little sympathy.

For those employed by LEAs the futureis bleak indeed. There- election of a Conservativegovernment in 1992 has ensured that LEAjurisdictionover polytechnics, colleges, and now all institutions of further education hasended. Local management of schools willcontinueand numbers of grant-maintained schools will rapidly increase. Thevery future of LEAs and of all their employees is in doubt.

Headteachers and other senior staffin schools are undergoing drastic changes in role, changes forwhich they may have had very little training or experience. Their formercontrol over what should be taught in schoolshas virtually disappeared. Instead, in common with teachers in further and higher education, they are being calledupon to exercise much greater financial and entrepreneurial skills.Classroom teachersare struggling with the formalities of nationalassessment.

Whether such massive changes ofstructure and role will in the longer term be beneficial isnot yet clear. There is a danger that the culture of bureaucracy willsimply be transferredto schools and other educational institutions. Professional leadership may, of necessity, giveway to mere management. As Cornbleth has suggested inrespect of the USA, 'Preoccupation with management and accountabilitytechniques is accompanied by a ueglect of purpose, substance and value', whileMacpherson 8 717-

has commented on educational reform inNew Zealand that 'De- bureaucratism, the converse ofbureaucracy, of reflects the limits bureaucratic thought. The concern responsiveness and to localise to encourage responsibilityappears to have given less priority to learninghow to and significant in education.' articulate what is best (SchoolsCouncil, 1990, 140) Such arguments, however,are not likely governments of the radical Right to deter Conservative in the UnitedKingdom which, since 1988, have set out to donothing lessthan to reverse the course of ducational history:principally by weakening, eventually and eliminating, those localeducational authorities upon which, since 1870, thevery existence andprogress of a national system of education hasbeen thoughtto depend.

References Department of Education and Science, The Government's Expenditure Plans, 1992-93 to 1994-95,London, 1992. Handy, C., Taken for granted? Understanding schools as organizations, York, 1984.

Jacques, M.,'Wanted: new ideasto prevent a painful death', Sunday Times, 19.4.1992.

Marston, P., 'Heads back school cashreforms', Daily Telegraph, 3.4.1992.

Schools Council, Australia'sTeachers. An Agenda for the Next Decade, Canberra, 1990.

Sharp, P. and Dunford, J., TheEducation System in England and Wales, Harlow, 1990

Statham, J. and Mackinnon, D., The EducationFact File, London, 1991.

Unesco, World Education Report 1991, Paris, 1991.